RAKAM SINGH Vs. BHAGVAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction, which is numbered as O.S. No. 57 of 2005 and is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Roorkee, District Haridwar. Petitioner filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, seeking leave to amend the plaint. In his application, he contended that during pendency of the suit, he has been dispossessed from the land in question, therefore, he be permitted to add two new paragraphs in the plaint and relief of mandatory injunction may also be permitted to be added. The said application was allowed by the learned Trial Court vide order dtd. 5/4/2021. However, in the revision filed by respondent nos. 1 & 2, the order passed by Trial court was set aside vide judgment dtd. 24/3/2022. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has preferred this writ petition, challenging Revisional Court's judgment.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) Learned Trial Court allowed the amendment application filed by petitioner by holding that leave to amend has been sought by the plaintiff to bring on record the developments, which took place during pendency of the suit, and amendment, if allowed, will not change the nature of the suit, and rejection of amendment application will lead to multiplicity of litigation. However, learned Revisional Court has set aside the order passed by learned Trial Court, only on the ground that amendment was sought by the plaintiff belatedly.